President Obama Says He Can't Pardon Snowden (arstechnica.com)

Joe Mullin, writing for Ars Technica:A campaign to pardon NSA leaker Edward Snowden, launched in combination with a fawning Oliver Stone film about him, hasn't made any headway. The request spurred the entire membership of the House Select Committee on Intelligence, 13 Republicans and nine Democrats, to send a letter to President Barack Obama urging against a pardon. "He is a criminal," they stated flatly. Obama weighed in on the matter on Friday. During his European tour, he was interviewed by Der Spiegel -- the largest newspaper in Germany, a country where Snowden is particularly popular. After discussing a wide range of issues, he was asked: Are you going to pardon Edward Snowden? Obama replied: "I can't pardon somebody who hasn't gone before a court and presented themselves, so that's not something that I would comment on at this point." He continued: I think that Mr. Snowden raised some legitimate concerns. How he did it was something that did not follow the procedures and practices of our intelligence community. If everybody took the approach that I make my own decisions about these issues, then it would be very hard to have an organized government or any kind of national security system. At the point at which Mr. Snowden wants to present himself before the legal authorities and make his arguments or have his lawyers make his arguments, then I think those issues come into play. Until that time, what I've tried to suggest -- both to the American people, but also to the world -- is that we do have to balance this issue of privacy and security.

Comments

And Obama once again is a blatant liar

[Indy1]

President Ford pardoned Nixon for the watergate scandal, and Nixon never stepped inside a court for his misdeeds.

Re:And Obama once again is a blatant liar

[BarbaraHudson]

Obama is just phoning it in nowadays. What started off so well 8 years ago ("Hope and Yes we can" in 2008) has morphed into "hopeless" and "no we can't."

Like the promise for the most open administration ever, and giving the insurance companies the ACA - the gift that keeps on giving. Even a year ago I would have said that Obama would go down in history as one of the best presidents. Was I ever wrong.

Re:And Obama once again is a blatant liar

[nightcats]

Yes, he is. As Amy Goodman keeps reminding us: governments lie, politicians lie -- and the corporations that own them definitely lie. That's their business, it seems, so it must be the business of both professional journalists and private citizens to relentlessly expose the lies.

Re:And Obama once again is a blatant liar

[ClickOnThis]

And many people considered it to be a totally corrupt move by Ford. Just because some other a-hole did something and got away with it doesn't mean Obama should too.

Fair point, but not relevant here. The point is not whether Obama should pardon Snowden, it's whether he could. And the answer is yes.

Re:And Obama once again is a blatant liar

[Anonymous Coward]

That's just one part of the lie. The other is "At the point at which Mr. Snowden wants to present himself before the legal authorities and make his arguments or have his lawyers make his arguments, then I think those issues come into play."

Obama fucking well knows that Snowden has been accused under the Espionage Act which does not allow him to defend his acts, only to deny them. Which would be absurd in Snowden's case. It will be an open-and-shut verdict of "guilty, full penalty" without Snowden legally being permitted to open his mouth.

I recommend you read up on the Ellsberg trial: Ellsberg was under the same accusation and the judge just shut the lawyer up when he tried to justify Ellsberg's acts. The transcript is sobering. The only reason Ellsberg did not receive a decade-long prison sentence is because the prosecution burglared into his doctor's offices, threatened people, installed eavesdropping devices for use when he was convening with his attorney, and ultimately the judge stated that he was unable to deliver anything amounting to justice under such circumstances and threw the whole case out of court.

But without that prosecutional misconduct at unprecedented levels, Ellsberg would have been fucked to hell and back.

And that's exactly what is in store for Snowden. The Espionage Act is not a tool for delivering justice but revenge. And Obama knows this as well as he knows that Ford pardoned Nixon and the Supreme Court gave his "all-ok" on it.

Fuck, Obama pardoned three people this year already that have not been formally accused.

He is just relying on being gone before the journalists have stocked up on the facts.

Re:And Obama once again is a blatant liar

[DarkOx]

The Constitution very explicitly grants the president the power to grant pardons at least for federal crimes there isn't really any legal question about that. There is lots president for presidents granting pardons for alleged crimes. So Obama certainly can legally pardon Snowden, he has the power as the executive to do that and he would be on much much firmer legal ground doing so that he is with many of his other executive actions!

He is just to much the sad sack to take responsibility, and say "I won't" while he thinks he can get away with "I can't".

Re:And Obama once again is a blatant liar

[saloomy]

They really should confiscate that shiny Nobel prize the dished out so earnestly. Peace, my ass.

Re:And Obama once again is a blatant liar

[hey!]

Really? Nixon being pardoned by the guy he nominated to the vice-presidency before resigning is your benchmark here?

Here's the case you want to bring up: Clinton's pardon of Marc Rich, which bears exactly on this case. Marc Rich had fled the country so as not to face an indictment. And it was technically legal to do so in that case, although it drew condemnation, even from Jimmy Carter.

Re:And Obama once again is a blatant liar

[HornWumpus]

And, as Amy Goodman knows firsthand: Propagandists lie.

Re:And Obama once again is a blatant liar

[jenningsthecat]

The president has 0 power to do most of the things that people apparently think they do.

That's entirely true, but largely irrelevant to the current discussion. The President certainly does have the power to pardon Snowden; there is no legal impediment, and now that Obama will almost certainly never hold any political office again, there is no substantial political impediment either.

Another commenter here noted that Ford pardoned Nixon when Nixon had never been in court over Watergate. Wikipedia agrees: "A presidential pardon may be granted at any time, however, and as when Ford pardoned Nixon, the pardoned person need not yet have been convicted or even formally charged with a crime". So when Obama says he "can't" pardon Snowden, he's doing something far worse than "phoning it in" - he's lying. It also seems rather cowardly - he should either pardon Snowden, or give whatever real reasons he may have for not doing so. When he hides behind "I can't" and implies that the law forbids him from doing it, he is simply uttering mealy-mouthed weasel words. Way to tarnish your own legacy, Mister President.

Re:And Obama once again is a blatant liar

[Trailer Trash]

So... you are saying that because Obama isn't going to pardon Snowden, he is phoning it in?

People put WAY too many hopes into the role of president. You are only setting yourself up for disappointment if you do this.

The president has 0 power to do most of the things that people apparently think they do.

You know, at some point you people will have to admit that Obama failed. Completely. Give. It. Up.

In this case we know that the President absolutely has the power to pardon Snowden. The grandparent makes the case absolutely by showing precedent (that's a big word that means "it's been done before") and some of the uncle posts provide further links.

So, the President absolutely has this power. He knows it. He's playing both sides by saying "gee, I wish I could, but I can't." It's a lie, but it gives idiots like you (wow, how did I know?) the cover to drool out "duh, he wants to but he, der, doesn't have the power to pardon Snowden" when someone calls him out on it.

It's the same way Democrats have been promising illegal aliens that they'll take care of them and protect them from evil Republicans and make the citizens while at the same time Obama has ramped up deportations to the point that he's sent more home than Bush and Clinton combined.

You're what we call a "useful idiot". I know, more of those pesky three-syllable words, but you might try looking it up to see what it means.

Re:And Obama once again is a blatant liar

[jcr]

you are saying that because Obama isn't going to pardon Snowden, he is phoning it in?

You're reversing the cause and effect. Obama isn't going to pardon Snowden, because he simply doesn't care enough to do the right thing for a man who has done far more for our country than Obama ever will.

-jcr

Re:And Obama once again is a blatant liar

[Bartles]

That doesn't hold water, because "I can't" was followed by an explanation of why he couldn't. and it happened to be total bullshit.

Re:And Obama once again is a blatant liar

[Bartles]

Yes, but Edward Snowden didn't donate a million dollars to Barack Obama's Presidential Library. If he won't pay, he can't expect to play.

Re:And Obama once again is a blatant liar

[BarbaraHudson]

The power of a president to grant a pardon is only limited by not being able to pardon in cases of impeachment.

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

Seems pretty straight-forward.

1 Snowden is alleged to have committed offences against the United States.
2. He is not being impeached.
3. Obama is president.
4. He can grant a reprieve or pardon according to the above-cited Constitution, Article 2, Section 2, Clause 1.

Congress cannot ignore the pardon. Snowden is free to testify and admit every damn thing, and there's nothing they can do about it, since it would have been pardoned. He probably would, because it would give him a platform and a chance to get all the crap into the congressional record. Congress does NOT want that. They would shit their collective pants.

Re: And Obama once again is a blatant liar

[SLi]

What is jrank and why should anybody trust in law matters a site that confuses prosecution with persecution?

Re:And Obama once again is a blatant liar

[um... Lucas]

We were attacked by a group of stateless outlaws on 9/11.

We retaliated against them shortly after, and opted to go after the state that had provided them sanctuary, and overthrew Taliban.

And then the Bush Administration provided fake evidence to the world about WMD's and terror connections in Iraq. When someone that knew better said something, they outed the fact that his wife was a CIA agent, putting her and her contacts at severe risk.

And then they invaded Iraq, overthrew Saddam, created a HUGE power vacuum, and the entire Baath party out on the street, military included. So you gave them zero reason to do anything but fight against the invaders. And provided a training ground for the worlds insurgents to come and practice their urban warfare skills, and spread out from there.

So yes. The middle east was already an unstable place, but Bush/Cheney Wars were entirely unnecessary, avoidable, and had horrendous side effects for us, the Iraqi's and the entire region.

Re:And Obama once again is a blatant liar

[Trailer Trash]

And likewise, you will consider Trump a failed president if he doesn't pardon Snowden? And you will consider him a failed president if he continues the Obama-era practice of deporting those deemed a threat to national security, border security and public safety?

If not, you're what we call a "hypocrite". I know, more of those pesky three syllable words, but you might try looking it up to see what it means.

The problem isn't Obama's failure to pardon Snowden. It's the lying. I'd have more respect for him if he said "I could pardon Snowden if I wanted to but I don't want to". Instead, he's lying about it so that idiots like you can claim that he wants to do the right thing but can't.

I'm not a Trump supporter. I suppose you live in the typical black and white world where I have to love one and hate the other, so if I say anything you consider "bad" about Obama that means I'm a Trump fan.

I live in a different world than you, one where people can actually have far more complicated opinions and can be critical of politicians of all stripes. But, I can understand how a simpleton would be scared of such a place where people think for themselves.

procedures and practices, eh?

[Anonymous Coward]

How he did it was something that did not follow the procedures and practices of our intelligence community.

Because that worked out so well for William Binney and Thomas Drake: in an unannounced, armed, early morning raid, a dozen agents armed with rifles appeared at his house, one of whom entered the bathroom and pointed his gun at Binney, who was taking a shower. The FBI confiscated a desktop computer, disks, and personal and business records.[14] The NSA revoked his security clearance, forcing him to close a business he ran with former colleagues at a loss of a reported $300,000 in annual income. The FBI raided the homes of Wiebe and Loomis, as well as House Intelligence Committee staffer Diane Roark, the same morning. Several months later the Bureau raided the home of then still active NSA executive Thomas Andrews Drake who had also contacted DoD IG, but anonymously with confidentiality assured.

Point is: when even at the very top levels of government the Constitution is completely ignored, there can be no rule of law, so laws in this situation are not relevant. If you want your underlings to follow "procedures and practices", best you lead by example, and not ignore both the spirit and the letter of the foundational document of the nation.

Also, as TFA notes, it is absolutely untrue that he cannot pardon Mr Snowden if he so wishes.

Obama's bullshit answer

[nanospook]

1. Snowden did attempt to go through proper channels. The big ignore..
2. He had no whistleblower protections in place.
3. If he had surrendered, he would have been subjected to torture and punishment without trial. FISA court..
4. This is like the only thing that congress has agreed with Obama on in both terms.. That in itself should be a red flag..
5. With guarantees for fairness, he would have faced a court. Couldn't get those guarantees.

Re:Obama's bullshit answer

[Jason Levine]

I'd also add, other whistle-blowers came forward before Snowden and found themselves the target of trumped up charges against them while the issues the whistle-blowers raised were swept under the rug.

Above post is absolutely correct

[HBI]

Lest you downmod for political reasons. Obama could pardon anyone for anything - the power is unfettered.

Re: Above post is absolutely correct

[davidwr]

Well, anything Federal, which includes military offenses and offenses against territorial- and similar governments such as Puerto Rico or Washington, D.C., and their respective local governments. I'm not sure if it applies to crimes against Native American tribes.

For the benefit of non-Americans not familiar with our legal system, the President cannot pardon offenses commited againts the 50 states or their respective local governments.

Prediction

[MAXOMENOS]

Putin, as part of his promise to Donald Trump that he will not interfere in the internal affairs of the United States, will deport Snowden to the US within a year of Trump taking office.

Coward

[Shane_Optima]

Goddamn coward. This is a prime example of the anemia of the left right here. Obama used to stand against the abuses of the Patriot Act and mass surveillance and then you sold out completely--and some of that is due to the dirty realities in the world, yes I get that maybe closing Guantanamo wasn't going to be as simple as all that, but here he is in the closing weeks of your presidency and he can't even make a token effort to support the ideals he once claimed to hold. The perjurer Clapper walked free and will even keep his job right through the very end.

And why are you doing it, Mr. President? Because your entire plan is to play meek and non-controversial, try to not rock the boat and give the Republicans more and more rope from which to hang themselves. That's been your strategy the whole time, and it's backfired almost every step of the way. Admittedly, you have slightly better chances hoping a Trump presidency with Republicans controlling senate and house, but... goddamn it man. If you wanted to have a nuanced view on the matter, you could have at least had Clapper arrested. Or fired.

Commute Chelsea Manning's sentence

[Fwipp]

Then how about he commutes the sentence of Chelsea Manning - someone who went before a military court instead of running, who's already served more time than any other whistleblower in our nation's history?

http://www.politico.com/story/...

Yes He Can

[cstacy]

Legal experts agree that the President can pardon someone even if there has been no charge; they need only specify in broad terms.
For example:

Now, Therefore, I, Gerald R. Ford, President of the United States, pursuant to the pardon power conferred upon me by Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution, have granted and by these presents do grant a full, free, and absolute pardon unto Richard Nixon for all offenses against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 20, 1969 through August 9, 1974.

The reasons that Obama won't pardon Snowden are two: First, he doesn't want to. Second, it would beg the question of pardoning Hillary Clinton.